It is always important to consider how the two forwards will play together. The US track record of success has included a target forward and a speedster. Sometimes this means leaving a talented player on the bench. The 2000 olympic team comes to mind with Donovan losing out to Wolff in the speedster role. The question: will McBride have enough left in his tank in 2006? The statement: players that don't fit into either the Speedster Role or Target role will not be successful at the international level. Razov is the classic example of a player that plays the speedster role, but doesn't have the pace to get it done. Twellman's lack of international pace is also a concern; however, he would play much better next to McBride. Mathis is another player that doesn't fit into either role. This is one of the reasons that he wasn't given many minutes in 2002 WC IMO. The good news: Ed Johnson and Freddy Adu may be able to take over as the speedster if Josh Wolff never gets back to 100%. Ed Johnson is a big guy, but not a classic target guy. He can however finish and run quite fast. The Bad news: who other than McBride and Casey has the size and strength to play as the target forward?
I think Eddie Buddle and Santino could become target forwards just based on their size. Also if Freddy grows 4 to 6 inches, he could become a target and a speed forward.
Id expect to have someone by 2006 other than McBride, but I wouldnt be suprised if this remains a muddled issue till 2005.
The sooner we realize we don't need one, the better off as a squad we'll be. If you have one, you use him and play to him. If not, you try something else. Plenty of teams have won World Cups without prototypical target forwards including the most recent one. We are still WAY to reliant at pumping long balls up the field to a target guy in hopes of winning the ball. Not only is it not effective without the right guy, but it's about as boring as the game gets. Under the right style, I'd have no problem with a Wolff/Donovan type pairing up top, a single striker set up with attacking mids, or a line of three forwards. We need to expand our horizons a little as we continue to improve so we can play whatever style the situation dictates.
Id agree that at times we are too reliant on long balls forward, but I disagree that it isnt valuable or even nescessary for our team to have that option. Set pieces are also a consideration, we dont have many positions where we are going to have guys that are going to make good targets or markers, so there is that added consideration. I also think its important to have a player that physically can hold there own with against a pair of large physical center backs, since we have so many attacking small fries.
Knox Cameron is a big guy (6'3") and plays target forward pretty well. Right now he is one of the top two or three U-20's up front. I could see him eventually getting some PT with the USMNT if he continues to improve. He is more than a handful on corners and set pieces, and he is also pretty skilled with the ball at his feet.
Forward thinking................ there will be many new faces on the 2006WC team, some we might not have even seen yet or even thought of
whomever i don't think "da bruce" is so set in his ways to go out looking for an identical setup to 2002. he had a target forward, he used a target forward. he will go with what he's got, so we all have to wait and see. maybe we have two speedsters, maybe two targets, maybe we line up in a 5-5.... time will tell.
Bruce is one of the few coaches that will determine his system based on the players he has available. Too many coaches have their system and select the best players to fill it in. YOu should play your best players no matter where they fit.
I saw Knox Cameron play for the Brooklyn Knights in the PDL at the Met Oval. He is pretty good, but not at a level that I could see him starting in the World Cup finals. He has professional potential but, as Wanderer said, college ball will hold him back if he stays there.
ok, it is but we don't know who will be on that 2006 team honestly we pretty much think adu will be on it, 3 weeks ago we didn't
So if my 10 best field players are 5-5 forwards I should play them? Seriously though, you have to put the 11 on the field that play best together, and that may or may not be the best 11 you have taken only as individuals.